|
Author: Tony Pay ★2017
Date: 2005-06-25 22:23
I'm totally in agreement with the notion that it is the consideration of the context of musical notation that is the most important thing.
But of course, the very statement of that assumes that the content of musical notation is read accurately. And strangely enough, we insist on accurate content in order to give ourselves greater, not lesser freedom:
"Every task involves constraint
Solve it now without complaint.
There are magic links and chains
Forged to loose our rigid brains;
Structures, strictures, though they bind
Strangely liberate the mind"
(James Falen, translator of 'Eugene Onegin')
If we can too easily change the notes (or whatever else is in the content, like dynamics) in order to conform to a quickly arrived at context, we risk being condemned to what we 'merely like'. And as Bastien found out in 'The Neverending Story', what you merely like is very different from what you 'really want'.
The content of the musical notation is like a map, including everything that we know about how, why and and by whom that map was constructed, and how to read it (including the composer's history and obiter dicta) -- and the musical performance is like a corresponding territory, instances of which there may well be a very large number.
So it's in the possibilities of how we might read the map that I'd want you to include your High School student's ideas, weighted appropriately, and I'd want you to include there what your audience and teachers said too.
But the final job of embodying a possible territory is always yours -- and it essentially consists of producing a 'making sense' of the map from within yourself, at the moment of performance.
My suggestion then, is that you start out with the notion of your making sense of it (which, you'll notice, inevitably involves you).
Possibly interesting references:
http://test.woodwind.org/Databases/Klarinet/2002/09/000553.txt
http://test.woodwind.org/Databases/Klarinet/2002/10/000263.txt
Tony
Post Edited (2005-06-26 12:55)
|
|
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-20 13:36 |
|
Kevin |
2005-06-20 15:58 |
|
GBK |
2005-06-20 17:39 |
|
Jack Kissinger |
2005-06-20 20:42 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-20 21:26 |
|
davyd |
2007-09-19 17:35 |
|
GBK |
2005-06-20 21:12 |
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-21 03:07 |
|
diz |
2005-06-21 09:17 |
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-21 13:18 |
|
clarnibass |
2005-06-21 14:47 |
|
William |
2007-09-18 18:30 |
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-21 17:29 |
|
Bob A |
2005-06-21 22:39 |
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-22 03:53 |
|
clarnibass |
2005-06-22 05:56 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-22 13:51 |
|
Ryan25 |
2006-02-19 19:22 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-22 13:57 |
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-22 14:21 |
|
Bob A |
2005-06-22 16:59 |
|
Mark Charette |
2005-06-22 17:06 |
|
Bob A |
2005-06-22 20:14 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-23 13:50 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-23 19:14 |
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-24 03:06 |
|
SueSmith |
2005-06-24 03:22 |
|
John J. Moses |
2005-06-24 03:42 |
|
SueSmith |
2005-06-24 03:50 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-24 22:26 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-24 19:55 |
|
SueSmith |
2005-06-24 23:55 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-25 01:30 |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-25 15:05 |
|
ken |
2005-06-25 03:14 |
|
SueSmith |
2005-06-25 17:44 |
    |
Re: Neidich's Copland vs. Goodman's Copland? new |
|
Tony Pay |
2005-06-25 22:23 |
|
Ken Shaw |
2006-02-20 00:45 |
|
Tony Pay |
2006-02-20 03:26 |
|
Tom Puwalski |
2006-02-20 12:24 |
|
Ryan25 |
2006-02-20 15:13 |
|
David Spiegelthal |
2006-02-20 15:51 |
|
Tom Puwalski |
2006-02-20 17:14 |
|
allencole |
2006-02-20 17:16 |
|
crnichols |
2006-02-20 17:21 |
|
John J. Moses |
2006-02-20 18:36 |
|
Phat Cat |
2006-02-20 21:00 |
|
aberkow |
2006-02-20 22:02 |
|
BobD |
2007-09-18 22:44 |
|
Mark G Simon |
2007-09-19 14:43 |
The Clarinet BBoard
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
